Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 TMI Notes - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • Benami Property
  • Bill
  • Central Excise
  • Companies Law
  • Customs
  • DGFT
  • FEMA
  • GST
  • GST - States
  • IBC
  • Income Tax
  • Indian Laws
  • Money Laundering
  • SEBI
  • SEZ
  • Service Tax
  • VAT / Sales Tax
Types:
---- All Types ----
  • ---- All Types ----
  • Act Rules
  • Case Laws
  • Circulars
  • Manuals
  • News
  • Notifications
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Jurisdictional Prerequisites for Initiating Reassessment u/s 148: Non-Depoist of TDS by the Employer
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Revisiting the Scope of "Record" u/s 263: Embracing Subsequent Records
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Interpreting "Record": Revisiting the Scope of Revision Powers u/s 264 and Rectification of Mistake ...
    The Doctrine of Natural Justice in GST Proceedings: A Case Study on Show Cause Notice u/s 74"
    Input Tax Credit (ITC) and the Concept of "Plant" under GST: Supreme Court
    Case LawsCustoms
    Inordinate Delay in Adjudication: High Court's Stance on Quashing Show Cause Notices
    Case LawsCustoms
    Inordinate Delay in Adjudication: Upholding the Principles of Natural Justice
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Supreme Court Upholds Validity of Re-Assessment Notices Issued During COVID-19 Lockdown
    Case LawsIndian Laws
    Unraveling the Mineral Rights Regime: The Supreme Court's Landmark Judgment
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Navigating the Faceless Assessment Regime: A Judicial Perspective
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Evidentiary Value of Statements Recorded During Income Tax Surveys: A Judicial Analysis
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Faceless Assessment: Ensuring Compliance with Statutory Provisions
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Faceless Assessment Mechanism: Jurisdictional Limits in Income Tax Proceedings
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Reassessment Notices for AY 2013-14: Upholding the Doctrine of Limitation
    Principles of Tax Fairness and Mens Rea: Quashes Penalty for Mere Technical Errors
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Decoding the Mandatory Timelines: A Thorough Examination of the Income Tax Assessment Order Nullific...
    Expiry of E-Way Bill AND Mens Rea: Technical Violation Alone Insufficient for Penalty Imposition
    Maintainability of Appeals: High Court Upholds Strict Interpretation of Limitation Provisions in GST...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Stay of Tax Demand: Interpreting the Discretionary Power u/s 220(6) of the Income Tax Act
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Interpreting "Technical Services" under Tax Treaties: A Comprehensive Analysis
❯❯
MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder

No Folders have been created

    +

    Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

    NOTE:

    Notes
    Showing Results for :
    Reset Filters
    Results Found:
    Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Jurisdictional prerequisite: notice in the name of a deceased person invalidates reassessment initiation under Section 148.
    A notice under Section 148 issued in the name of a deceased person is a jurisdictional defect because a valid notice to the correct person is a condition precedent to reopening an assessment; legal representatives have no statutory duty to intimate death; where salary tax has been deducted at source, reassessment cannot be pursued against the deceased or their representatives, and employer non-deposit of TDS does not create an outstanding demand against the assessee or their legal representatives.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Revisional power: Commissioner may consider subsequent records available at time of examination in tax proceedings.
    The Court construed the Commissioner's revisional power to permit consideration of all materials relating to the proceeding that are available at the time of his examination, including documents and valuation reports that came on the file after the assessment order; the Explanation to the provision was read as clarificatory, giving an inclusive meaning to "record" rather than restricting it to what the Assessing Officer had when passing the assessment.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Revision powers under section 264: Commissioner must consider expanded record and rehear revision petitions on merits.
    The Court held that the Commissioner must consider a revision petition on its merits and that the term record in revision proceedings extends beyond the return and assessment order to include material from other sources and prior assessments. It emphasised consistency in treatment of continuing transactions and required the Principal Commissioner to take into account all relevant materials, identify any apparent mistakes, afford a personal hearing, and pass a reasoned order within a short timeframe.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Natural justice in tax proceedings: show cause notices must allege fraud or concealment before enhanced recovery is invoked.
    The court quashed the enhanced-provision show cause notice for failing to allege the essential elements of fraud, willful misstatement, or suppression of facts and held that the enhanced regime may be invoked only when the adjudicating authority is prima facie satisfied of those elements and records that satisfaction in the notice; absent such express allegations the proceedings are without jurisdiction though fresh proceedings may be initiated with a proper notice.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Plant classification under GST: functionality test determines ITC eligibility for buildings serving special technical requirements.
    The expression plant or machinery in Section 17(5)(d) of the CGST Act must be interpreted by reference to functionality rather than by equating it with the statutory definition of "plant and machinery." A building qualifies as a plant for ITC purposes if, on the facts, it was planned and constructed to serve the assessee's special technical or operational requirements. The functionality test is fact-specific and requires case-by-case analysis of the building's role in the assessee's business.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Show AI Summary
    Inordinate delay in adjudication bars further proceedings on stale show cause notices absent a reasonable explanation.
    The court found the delay from 2008 to 2021 inordinate and unexplained, concluding the respondents did not provide a reasonable explanation; the delayed transfer to the call book without intimation breached statutory intimation requirements, and established precedent limits reliance on higher authority to excuse gross unexplained delays in adjudication of show cause notices.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Show AI Summary
    Inordinate delay in adjudication undermines procedural fairness and bars continuation of prolonged, unexplained proceedings.
    The court found that prolonged, unexplained delay in adjudicating a show cause notice breached procedural fairness and natural justice, causing irretrievable prejudice by impairing evidence preservation and business planning. Delay attributable to the revenue authorities, contrary to Tribunal directions for timely disposal, rendered continuance of proceedings unsustainable and emphasized the necessity of justifying delay and ensuring timely adjudication.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Pandemic relief legislation upheld: re-assessment notices issued during lockdown remain valid despite later procedural rule.
    The court interpreted the pandemic relief legislation as providing comprehensive relief that extended to procedural obligations in force at the time of issuance, not confined solely to extensions of time. It applied the principle that statutes operate prospectively and concluded the later-introduced procedural provision does not apply retrospectively to invalidate earlier-issued re-assessment notices, limiting its analysis to the validity of issuance and not the merits of re-assessment proceedings.
    Case LawsIndian Laws
    Show AI Summary
    Central legislative competence over mineral regulation affirmed; royalties characterised as compensation for resource depletion, limiting state levies.
    The Court concluded that the central legislative framework occupies the field of mineral regulation and that royalties are compensation for depletion of state-owned natural resources, not conventional taxes; consequently the Centre may impose such levies while States remain constrained from imposing royalties in the nature of compensation that would encroach on the Centre's exclusive regulatory domain.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Faceless assessment mechanism requires reassessment steps to follow a centralized faceless procedure, otherwise territorial officer lacks jurisdiction.
    The Scheme framed under the enabling provision must be read to include preliminary proceedings linked to reassessment, so that reassessment initiation and related steps follow the faceless mechanism; concurrent exercise of territorial and faceless functions would undermine the Scheme's purpose and render steps taken outside the faceless protocol inconsistent with the statutory framework.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Evidentiary value of survey statements: survey disclosures lack conclusive weight and require independent corroboration.
    Statements recorded during a tax survey are permissive and not taken on oath, so they are not conclusive evidence by themselves; they cannot be treated as inherently incriminating material to justify reopening assessments or making additions without independent corroboration, and must be recorded free of coercion in line with administrative instructions and judicial precedents.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Faceless assessment jurisdiction: JAO lacked authority under the statutory faceless procedure, invalidating improperly issued notices.
    The court determined that reassessment notices and related proceedings were inconsistent with the statutory faceless assessment framework because they were issued without following the prescribed allocation of jurisdiction and procedural sequence under the faceless mechanism; administrative orders purportedly exempting cases were not read to displace the statutory requirements and earlier precedent interpreting the faceless provisions was applied.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Faceless Assessment: statutory scheme governs jurisdiction and extends to central and international taxation proceedings.
    The court analysed Section 151A read with Sections 144B and 148A and held that administrative instructions dated March 31, 2021 and September 6, 2021 issued under section 119 apply only to assessment orders and do not extend to proceedings under Sections 148A and 148; those instructions cannot be read into the scheme notified on March 29, 2022. The mandatory faceless procedure under Sections 144B and 151A applies to notices and proceedings, including central charges and international taxation charges, and notices issued outside that mechanism fall outside the statutory jurisdictional framework.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Doctrine of limitation prevents revival of lapsed reassessment powers; administrative instructions cannot "travel back in time."
    The court held that when the right to reopen assessment had already lapsed under the pre amended limitation regime, subsequent amendments or administrative instructions could not revive that right; administrative attempts to "travel back in time" and extend limitation were invalid, assessees retain the defence of limitation, and pandemic era notifications did not cover years whose limitation had already expired.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Mens rea requirement in tax penalties: technical errors without intent cannot justify penalty imposition under GST compliance.
    Requirement of mens rea for imposition of tax penalties is central where e Way Bill compliance is questioned. Mere procedural or timing inconsistencies, without evidence of intent to evade tax and where valid tax invoices accompany the goods and tax has been charged, do not justify penal action. Authorities must establish culpable intent with cogent reasoning and comply with procedural and natural justice safeguards before imposing penalties.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Mandatory timelines under Section 144C require assessments to be completed within the prescribed month after DRP direction, else invalid.
    Once the DRP framed directions, the Assessing Officer was obliged to complete the assessment in conformity with those directions within one month from the end of the month in which the DRP's direction was served; service by uploading the DRP directive on the ITBA portal constitutes valid service for computing that period. The procedure does not envisage further involvement of the Transfer Pricing Officer once the DRP's direction is issued and an order under the transfer pricing provision has been remitted to the AO.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Mens rea requirement: technical expiry of an e way bill alone cannot justify a tax penalty without intent to evade.
    The court held that a purely technical lapse in E Way Bill formalities - where goods were otherwise covered by two e invoices and two E Way Bills and there was no dispute on consignor, consignee or goods - does not demonstrate the mens rea necessary to impose a penalty under the tax penal provision; authorities' focus on the expired E Way Bill alone was legally insufficient given documentary explanations and absence of intent to evade tax.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Exclusion of Limitation Act: GST Act's specific appellate time limits operate as a self contained code, barring general extensions.
    The court analysed whether the GST Act's appellate limitation regime operates as a complete code excluding the general Limitation Act. It applied the principle that fiscal statutes with detailed procedural and temporal rules are to be strictly construed, treating the special statute's limitation provision as implying exclusion of the Limitation Act's extension mechanism, and emphasised policy aims of expeditious dispute resolution, revenue certainty and administrative finality.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Assessing Officer discretion in granting stay of tax demand cannot be rigidly constrained by administrative OMs, requiring case specific consideration.
    The Assessing Officer's discretionary power under section 220(6) to grant stay of tax demand is not fettered by CBDT Office Memorandums; those OMs are administrative guidelines and do not mandate a uniform pre deposit. The AO must consider prima facie case, likelihood of success, and undue hardship and may require a higher, lower or no deposit depending on case specific facts. Administrative adjustment of refunds without considering a pending stay application was held arbitrary and the matter was remitted for reconsideration applying these principles.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Technical services interpretation requires specialized expertise and a demonstrable link to payments for withholding tax consequences.
    Interpretation of technical services under the India Ireland DTAA requires the application or transfer of specialized knowledge, skill or expertise; incidental training or assistance enabling a reseller to market standard software does not meet that threshold. The Reseller Agreement did not contemplate technology transfer or bespoke solutions, payments were tied to reseller net revenue, and the record lacked material linking remittances to customized technical services. Authorities must establish an evidentiary and contractual nexus between payments and provision of specialized technical services before applying withholding tax under the treaty.

    TMI Notes

    Back

    All TMI Notes

    Showing Results for :
    Reset Filters
      No Records Found

      TMI Notes

      Back

      All TMI Notes

      whatsappJoin Channel
      Showing Results for : Reset Filters

      Comparison of SCHEDULE IV "INCOME NOT TO BE INCLUDED IN TOTAL INCOME OF ELIGIBLE NON-RESIDENTS, FOREIGN COMPANIES AND OTHER SUCH PERSONS" between the Income-Tax Act, 2025 (as passed) and the Income-Tax Bill, 2025 (as originally introduced)

      18 September, 2025

      Contents
      Acts
      Rules & Regulations
      Summary
      Note

      Note

      -

      Bookmark

      Print

      Print

      SCHEDULE IV - INCOME NOT TO BE INCLUDED IN TOTAL INCOME OF ELIGIBLE NON-RESIDENTS, FOREIGN COMPANIES AND OTHER SUCH PERSONS

      Income-tax Act, 2025

      At a Glance

      Schedule IV (Old Version) to the Income Tax Bill, 2025 lists categories of income that shall not be included in the total income of specified eligible non-residents, foreign companies and other persons (see section 11 reference). It matters for non-resident individuals and foreign entities interacting with India (embassies, foreign enterprises, foreign companies, European Economic Community etc.). Effective date or decision date: Not stated in the document.

      Background & Scope

      Statutory hook: SCHEDULE IV is framed under "See section 11" of the Bill. The Schedule sets out tabulated exemptions (column A: serial number; B: income not to be included; C: eligible persons; D: conditions). The Schedule covers diverse categories including interest on NRE accounts, diplomatic remuneration, employees of foreign enterprises, incomes linked to foreign ships, government trainees, royalties/fees for technical services to specified security agencies, offshore banking unit deposits, cruise ship lease rentals, investments by the European Economic Community, and specified crude-oil related receipts to foreign companies. Definitions or explanatory notes: Note 1 (Sl. No. 9) defines "specified company", "holding company" and "subsidiary company"; Note 2 defines "European Economic Community". No other standalone definitions are provided within the Schedule.

      Statutory Provision Mode

      Text & Scope

      The Schedule operates by excluding from computation of total income certain enumerated receipts of eligible non-residents and foreign companies, subject to conditions. Each serial entry specifies (i) the class of income, (ii) the class of eligible person(s), and (iii) conditions that must be satisfied for the income to be excluded. The exclusions are limited to the headings set out in the Table. The Schedule cross-references other statutory instruments: section 2(w) of the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 (for residency definition), section 2(u) of the Special Economic Zones Act, 2005 (for Offshore Banking Unit), and sections of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for certain sub-sections listed at Sl. No. 14).

      Interpretation

      Legislative intent, as discernible from textual structure: to provide targeted exemptions for certain foreign-sourced or diplomatically connected incomes, strategically significant commercial arrangements (e.g., crude oil storage/sale by notified foreign companies), and to maintain reciprocity for diplomatic personnel. The Schedule uses notification powers (Central Government) and pre-conditions (e.g., residence outside India, RBI permission, aggregate days of stay) as mechanisms to limit the benefit to particular factual situations. The text indicates that the exemption is conditional rather than absolute, requiring specified factual predicates and administrative notifications.

      Exceptions/Provisos

      Carve-outs and conditions appear in column D against each serial number. Notable conditions include:

      • Sl. No. 1: interest on moneys in a Non-Resident (External) Account in Indian banks as per FEMA and rules.
      • Sl. No. 2: diplomatic/trade commissioner exemption conditioned on reciprocity and staff status (not engaged in business/profession in India).
      • Sl. No. 3 and 4: time-bound presence (90 days aggregate in tax year) and absence of employer's taxable presence in India.
      • Sl. No. 6-7: notifications by Central Government and specified recipient being National Technical Research Organisation for certain royalties/fees.
      • Sl. No. 8: deposit date threshold (on or after 1 April 2005) and Offshore Banking Unit reference.
      • Sl. No. 9: intra-group cruise ship lease rental conditions, and temporal limitation to tax years beginning on or before 1 April 2029.
      • Sl. Nos. 11-13: Central Government notification and agreements/arrangements entered into or approved by Central Government, with national interest consideration, and limitations on activities of the foreign company in India.
      • Sl. No. 14: incomes falling under specified sections of the Income-tax Act, 1961 subject to conditions specified therein.

      Illustrations

      • Example 1: An individual non-resident holding a Non-Resident (External) Account with interest earned thereon - the interest is excluded from total income if the account is maintained as per FEMA and rules. (Directly consistent with text.)
      • Example 2: A non-citizen employee of a foreign enterprise who visits India for 60 aggregate days in the year to provide services for a foreign employer that has no trade or business in India - his remuneration for services rendered during the stay is excluded provided the remuneration is not taxable to the employer under the Act. (Consistent with Sl. No. 3.)
      • Example 3: A notified foreign company stores crude oil in India under a Central Government-approved arrangement and sells the oil to an Indian resident as per the agreement - the income accruing from storage and sale is not included in total income subject to notification. (Consistent with Sl. Nos. 12-13.)

      Interplay

      The Schedule expressly interacts with: FEMA, 1999 (residency definition and NR(E) accounts); Special Economic Zones Act, 2005 (Offshore Banking Units); and referenced sections of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for Sl. No. 14 exemptions. Several exemptions depend on Central Government notification or agreements entered into/approved by the Central Government, indicating administrative coordination between tax authorities and executive departments. No rules or notifications beyond these cross-references are reproduced in the document.

      Differences between SCHEDULE IV - Income-tax Act, 2025 (Document 1) and Income Tax Bill, 2025 - Old Version (Document 2)

      • Textual corrections and punctuation: Document 1 contains minor editorial differences (for example, punctuation and phrasing around clauses (a)-(d) under Sl. No. 11 and Sl. No. 12 are slightly more concise).
        • Practical impact: purely editorial; no substantive change in scope or meaning appears from the texts provided.
      • Minor wording differences on eligibility phrases: e.g., Document 2 in Sl. No. 8 specifies "Non-resident or a person who is not ordinarily resident in India," whereas Document 1 uses "Non-resident or a person who is not ordinarily resident."
        • Practical impact: nominal; contextually both identify same classes of persons; if interpreted strictly, omission of "in India" could raise an interpretive question but the intent remains the same.
      • Variation in presentation of Sl. No. 11 and 13 wording: Document 1 states that the Central Government may notify "any person in India" and that the foreign company and the agreement are notified "having regard to the national interest"; Document 2 requires that "such agreement is entered with the foreign company, having regard to the national interest, and the agreement or arrangement is notified."
        • Practical impact: Document 1 frames notification of the company and agreement slightly differently; both require Central Government notification and national-interest consideration. Substantively the scope of exemption is governed by Central Government notification; any difference is stylistic unless read to alter the sequencing of notification vs. entry of agreement - not expressly stated as a legal difference in the texts.
      • Formatting and small textual insertions: Document 2 contains a stray full stop after the clause in Sl. No. 7(b) and some additional bracket spacing in Sl. No. 14.
        • Practical impact: typographical; no substantive legal consequence discernible from the provided materials.

      Practical Implications

      • Compliance and risk areas: taxpayers and foreign entities must ensure that qualifying conditions (residency status, period of stay, RBI permission, Central Government notification/approval, and absence of trade or business in India) are satisfied and documented before claiming the exclusion. Failure to meet stated conditions risks disallowance and tax exposure.
      • Record-keeping/evidence: maintenance of residency documentation (FEMA definitions), RBI permissions for NR(E) accounts, travel and stay records (to evidence the 90-day threshold), copies of Central Government notifications/agreements, and employer payroll records to show whether employer's income is chargeable in India. For Sl. No. 9, intra-group corporate documentation establishing holding/subsidiary relationships as per Note 1 is relevant.

      Key Takeaways

      • Schedule IV enumerates limited classes of income excluded from "total income" for particular non-residents and foreign entities, subject to explicit conditions and administrative notifications.
      • Most exemptions require factual predicates (residency status, period of presence, non-engagement in business in India) and/or Central Government notification or agreement.
      • Several exemptions are purpose-specific (diplomatic reciprocity, security projects, national-interest crude oil arrangements, cruise ship group structures, EEC investment schemes).
      • Document differences between the Act version and the Bill old version are largely editorial and typographical; no substantive changes are discernible from the texts provided.
      • Taxpayers and advisers should retain documentary evidence of qualifying conditions and track Central Government notifications/approvals relevant to the Schedule.

      Full Text:

      SCHEDULE IV - INCOME NOT TO BE INCLUDED IN TOTAL INCOME OF ELIGIBLE NON-RESIDENTS, FOREIGN COMPANIES AND OTHER SUCH PERSONS

      Topics

      ActsIncome Tax